6 ms·

Big tech has disrupted the social contract

136 points by herbertl 2y ago

Terr_ 2y ago
A lot of it boils down to a promise that existing systems (and existing ways to handle error and deter wrongdoing) have somehow been replaced by "With An App" that efficiently reimplements what came before... but in reality most of the expensive features have been secretly removed, and you won't find that out until you're the one getting screwed. Come to think of it, a similar phenomenon applies to cryptocurrencies: Even when they aren't an outright fraud, somebody has just thrown away the hard parts learned over centuries, quietly dropping them or trying to convince you that it's better to be entirely without.
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  The general pattern is this: You create a system, it has problems, people establish some apparatus to address the problems, the apparatus is a central chokepoint which is then captured by incumbents and abused for oppression, people demand a new system, you create a new system, it has problems, ... You either need to prevent the apparatus from being captured by incumbents or you need to prevent it from being a central chokepoint that can be abused for oppression.
  - unclebucknasty 2y ago
    >The general pattern is this Definitely sounds like one vector, along with enshittification and other factors. >*You either need to prevent the apparatus...or..." That solution set kind of assumes that we must get to this point where those are the viable options. For me that begs the question, "what's underlying all of this that makes it so arriving here is the pattern?" For example, questioning what we can do about such centralization and entrenched incumbencies in the first place; exploring whether some industries should be not-for-profit or public benefit, etc. In general, the current system/economy presents a ton of inertia, frequently backed by network effects. I think we'll need to start looking at more creative/disruptive solutions for many of these issues.
    - nradov 2y ago
      There's nothing wrong with offering consumer services through not-for-profit or public benefit corporations. The problem is getting enough initial capital to keep it running until it's cash flow neutral. Regular investors want to maximize returns so then you're stuck trying to find wealthy people to donate. Good luck with that.
      - unclebucknasty 2y ago
        >Regular investors want to maximize returns It's a good point, and what you're really underscoring here gets to the heart of my comment—that is, the "creative/disruptive" solutions I referenced will require a re-think of everything, including the current "get investors who expect infinite returns" model. Likewise, expanding our thinking beyond wealthy donors being the only other alternative. So, for instance, crowd-fundable or lower capex businesses may need to be prioritized. There are many other creative avenues waiting to be discovered. Because, I agree that it's hard to see how you can keep all of these elements of the current model (and baseline assumptions) in place and expect a different outcome. So, once you pull the thread of disruption, it'll unwind a lot more that needs to be addressed/solved. But, I believe it would be worth the pull.
        nradov 2y ago
        That's just hand waving. The vast majority of people with capital will only ever be willing to invest based on expected returns. If they don't have a chance to make a significant profit on a risk-adjusted basis then they won't invest at all. They'll just keep their cash in the bank or spend it on consumption or real estate instead.
        unclebucknasty 2y ago
        >That's just hand waving. The vast majority of people with capital will only ever be willing... Yes, if the only option you can imagine for building a business is to go the traditional investor/VC route, then this is probably true. Kind of odd, though. You actually introduced the idea of "regular investors" being some sort of requirement, when the whole point is to re-imagine how we build businesses. But, I suppose all new ideas—especially disruptive ones—appear as hand waving, given that most people are unable to imagine beyond the status quo.
  - myroon5 2y ago
    “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/98215-every-great-cause-begins-as-a-movement-becomes-a-business https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/98215-every-great-cause-beg...
- netsharc 2y ago
  The whole "with crypto, you don't need to put your faith in anyone [foremost: the banking system], the ledger is the single source of truth" is depressing. Remember the word "credit" is Latin for "I believe/trust".
  - Rhapso 2y ago
    It turns put you can generally trust banks... to follow laws!
hellojimbo 2y ago
All of these peer to peer apps have the same fate; it works in the high trust parts of the country, but the moment you scale, the quality of service decreases, fees increase, etc.
- missedthecue 2y ago
  That's all businesses. Ever visited an inner city corner market? Items cost more, there's less selection, and quality of service? The employees are behind bulletproof glass.
SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
I don't understand this story. Why would you have an "expectation that the service will be professional", when you first heard about the company from news reports their service was used in multiple terrorist attacks? When was there ever a social contract that every company with an app can be trusted to provide high-quality service?
- charles_f 2y ago
  > their service was used in multiple terrorist attacks For as much as Turo sucks, the fact that vehicles used in terrorist attacks were rented through them is somewhat irrelevant to the trust you should put into the service ; not much more than where they ate their breakfast before, slept that night, or what brand of clothing they were wearing. It seems that said terrorists didn't have a criminal background, and they could very well have rented them through Avis, Enterprise and whatnot. They could have purchased Teslas, that would not have made Teslas a more terrorist-risk prone car than a Ford.
  - RegnisGnaw 2y ago
    Remember that both the WTC Bombing and Oklahoma City bombing used Ryder rental vans. Should we distrust Ryder van rentals?
  - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
    Right, it’s entirely irrelevant! So why was the source author surprised when he used this car rental company he had no reason to trust and they turned out to be untrustworthy?
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  Not only that, it sounds like the sort of thing that could happen with rental cars in general. The car is being rented out to randos, one of the randos does something sufficiently heinous with the car to cause the registration to be immediately suspended and then returns it without saying anything, the next renter gets a car with a suspended registration before the rental place gets the notice telling them about it.
namaria 2y ago
[flagged]
- IncreasePosts 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - DangitBobby 2y ago
    "Cinvicted criminal should be punished arbitrarily until they are dead."
    - _9za9 2y ago
      Found Eddie Huang's HN account
  - charles_f 2y ago
    Fact that it's in their file means they went through the justice system for it, and paid for their crime, which is precisely part of the social contract. Point of their article is that tech services should be bound to some similar expectation. What you're suggesting is that making some mistake in your early years makes you unredeamable to society's eyes. And even then, it's an attack ad hominem. Who makes an argument doesn't detracts from the argument's validity if it's a good one.
  - _9za9 2y ago
    Assault charges as a youth, dog mutilator as an adult. Did you see he cut off his dogs tail?
- DangitBobby 2y ago
  "Victim gets what he deserves."
  - namaria 2y ago
    At some point we need to know the difference between making decisions in good faith or seeking discounted goods and services in a way that jeopardize your own family safety. Knee-jerk reactions related to template interpretations of the situation do not help.
_heimdall 2y ago
I avoid the whole "sharing economy" as much as possible. I think I've taken an uber or lyft twice when I was in a pinch in a city I wasn't familiar with, and once ordered a truck part to be delivered from a store in town that ended up being through a third party app (I couldn't drive down without the replacement fuel pump). I really don't get the hope of trusting individuals that are arguably being taken advantage of by a faceless tech business rather than trusting employees or contractors that are at least more invested in customer service for the company. It makes about as much sense to me as distrusting humans so much that you want to put all your wealth in a glorified git repo coded by humans and run by a small number of people. Either trust people or don't, its a pretty simple choice. Convincing ourselves that a layer of tech can abstract humans away so much that we don't need to trust anyone is just absurd.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  it sounds like you are less trustful of strangers, not more - and i’m confused why you’re spinning it the opposite
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    I don't quite follow your point, can you help me out here? > it sounds like you are less trustful of strangers, not more Less trustful of strangers compared to what? > i’m confused why you’re spinning it the opposite What am I spinning the opposite? My point was that I don't trust the incentives behind the sharing economy and have no reason to expect better service than from the more service-focused businesses they're attempting to replace. I very much expect that I just didn't explain myself well in the earlier comment. Sorry about that.
narcraft 2y ago
"These tech companies used lobbies to destroy the enterprise structure of our civilization from taxi cab medallions to hotels to brick-and-mortar businesses." Taxi cab medallions are a very poor example to cite. I'm empathetic to the story of terrible customer service and share sentiments about the overall erosion of user experience with many tech-adjacent, so-called disruptive services, but the second anyone suggests we were better off with the taxi cab than Uber or Lyft, they lose all credibility in my eyes. I think the biggest benefit that many fail to mention is that you can actually get rides when and where you need to. For example, people have far fewer excuses to drunk drive from bars in my hometown now than they did 15 years ago. I've had my skin saved by several rides that would be impossible without ride-sharing services.
- narcraft 2y ago
  And for the record, I've also had comically bad experiences with Lyft and Uber including drivers ranting about other customers in smelly unkempt cars (while on a date!) and my ride being significantly delayed because the driver wanted to stop for gas and also got themselves dinner while they were there. And I still love this crap!
  - kelnos 2y ago
    Did you rate those drivers appropriately, and not tip them? In general I try to avoid giving any less than 5 stars for anything but a safety issue, because a low-4.x rating can get a driver deactivated. But stopping for gas and getting food? Nope, that's gonna get you a low rating. The ranting about other customers thing is something I'm torn on. Everyone has a bad day sometimes, and that shouldn't affect their livelihood. But still...
- dehrmann 2y ago
  Taxis are great if you're in Manhattan (or JFK) and not going too far uptown.
  - the_third_wave 2y ago
    It's been a while since I was at JFK but when I frequented it I always took the subway. Same for Heathrow, CDG, etc. I generally have much better experiences with general public transport than I do with any sort of taxi "service" but maybe I'm the odd one out?
dehrmann 2y ago
There's truth to the main point that "gig economy" companies aren't adequately held responsible for the services they broker or sell (depending on your perspective). They avoid risk in a way that isn't obvious to buyers until something goes wrong, and there are few enough horror stories that they can stay in business. That's the meat of the story. It goes off the rails a bit with quotes like these, and mentions "Big Tech," but is really about the gig economy brokers. > [tech billionaires] not only destroyed the financial system Not really. Maybe he lumped 2008 bankers in with tech, but Uber was the worst offender, and it disrupted a differently bad taxi medallion monopoly, not the "financial system." > These corporations don’t pay taxes Also not true. I'm sure some don't because they're not profitable, but you can't be not profitable forever.
- aprilthird2021 2y ago
  Yeah it's not a perfect article. But I appreciate the sentiment ultimately
- jimnotgym 2y ago
  >Also not true. I'm sure some don't because they're not profitable, but you can't be not profitable forever. They might pay taxes in some jurisdiction, but usually not in the UK. The profit problem is actually that they can be not profitable for a really long time due to VC money. Long enough to put competitors out of business, for instance
  - dehrmann 2y ago
    Uber and Lyft are both public and profitable, now. The drivers also pay taxes on their earnings.
waltercool 2y ago
[flagged]
- crooked-v 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract
  - NullPrefix 2y ago
    The description of social contract does not imply that it was signed by me
    - tomrod 2y ago
      Yet you are a significant beneficiary to it, ergo society has claim to you.
    - netsharc 2y ago
      Not a lawyer, but: When you order food at a restaurant, the law assumes an implied contract—you agree to pay for what you consume. Even without a written agreement, courts recognize this as a valid contract based on common practice. I wonder if a future society can allow geniuses like you to opt-out of the social contract, and there'd be outlaws roaming the lands, ready to rob you that evening, hey you agreed to opt out of police protection!
      - palata 2y ago
        In one sentence: "contract" does not not mean "legal contract" here.
      - NullPrefix 2y ago
        >When you order food at a restaurant once again, this is an implication that I ordered it. If you put a gun to my face and demand that I order a McBurger, that does not mean that we entered a contract.
  - 2y ago
Gunax 2y ago
[flagged]
- aprilthird2021 2y ago
  The guy had to order 2 cars since the first didn't show up, his second car was illegal to drive but still rented out to him, and then he was charged a bunch of clearly fraudulent fees by an angry "host" who is mad his car wasn't street legal. Idk, I think he has the right to complain about that. It's all wrong, and his time is worth something and should be compensated for.
- jimnotgym 2y ago
  It is OK to force corporations to provide the service that they were contracted to provide, yes. I think most right minded people would agree with that.
  - Gunax 2y ago
    That's correct. My criticism is that he bends this into a criticism of tech in general. As if they somehow denied him the ability to rent a car from somewhere else.
    - jimnotgym 2y ago
      It is a valid criticism of VC backed tech, awash with free money and able to operate below the margins of other rental firms, thereby forcing them out of business. It is also a valid criticism of tech firms that decide they can disrupt a market by pretending the rules don't apply to them. That is until the law catches up with them, by which time they have degraded their competition.
comrade1234 2y ago
My experience at rental car companies has in the last couple of years degraded to say the least. Customer service has been pretty hostile similar to the descriptions of turo in this article. I think part of it is consolidation of the companies. Hertz now seems to be hertz plus dollar plus some other company. Hertz used to be cool (and more expensive, now it’s one of the cheapest). It feels like it felt as the taxi companies were being killed by uber and later Lyft. Some external factor is causing them to fail and they’re floundering and clawing for every penny they can get. I never heard of turo but may check it out for my next trip to the USA. But I think the real killer of the rental car companies is rideshare. It’s now usually cheaper for me to do two rides a day on rideshare than to rent a car for a week.
- kelnos 2y ago
  > It’s now usually cheaper for me to do two rides a day on rideshare than to rent a car for a week. That's a big thing too. Whenever I have to rent a car, I go for the cheapest option, and that usually ends up being no lower than $60/day (plus taxes). If I only need it for a couple rides per day, that could very easily cost less. Plus I don't need to deal with gas, parking, or returning the car, worry about damaging the car, or ensure that I haven't had alcohol to drink before those trips.
- wenc 2y ago
  National Car is the best in my experience.
zombiwoof 2y ago
What’s amazing about Turo is how they just get around the law and regulation to screw everyone but themselves How? They don’t rent airport space they use existing lots. Hawaii airports are full all the time because Turo cars are parked in them waiting for passengers Image all the car companies doing that. Fuck Turo
ipv6ipv4 2y ago
He should have taken the car to the local police station to be impounded and started a credit card chargeback the moment Turo started demanding that he return a car that isn't legally drivable. It's still not too late to initiate the charge back.
- ycombinatrix 2y ago
  Don't forget to make notes of all communication with Turo & the "host"
TrackerFF 2y ago
I used to take Uber, now I'm back to taking regular cabs. I used to rent AirBnB, now I'm back to booking hotel rooms. And that goes for pretty much any "gigging" or "sharing" economy service. The past year, I've only used a food delivery service once.
jimnotgym 2y ago
I can't believe what I'm reading on this thread. I have seen two people argue that it is OK for a corporation to not provide the service it is contracted to provide. I have seen one argue that it is OK to commit fraud. I have seen one claim that there is no such thing as a social contract. I call you all out as sub-human, waste of a skin, unethical, money worshippers. Get a grip of yourselves before the pendulum swings back from the far right, and knocks you off your perch. The government and the law exist to keep property from the majority. If you erode those systems for short term business gains, you will lose that protection. Your smart mouths and Ayn Rand books won't offer the slightest resistance when the majority kick in your door, and take their share. Meritocracy won't mean 'who had a rich dad and went to a fancy school' anymore. Meritocracy will be about who is strongest, the nerd or the mob of manual labourers. What a bunch of clowns.
kelnos 2y ago
I've fortunately had nothing but great experiences renting through Turo, but a story like this will definitely give me pause if I am in the position of considering renting through them again. OP praises Enterprise, but I can't say I've ever had a delightful experience with them, or with any of the big car rental chains. Usually it involves a 20 minute wait in a line at an airport, followed by 10 minutes of someone typing into a computer for who knows what reason, followed by me wandering aimlessly in a parking lot looking for the correct car, which is always a surprise. There was also the time when I paid up front online for a car, and when I got there they wanted to give me an EV. I didn't want one, because I was pretty sure I was driving to a place with little to no charging infrastructure, and they ended up charging me more (surprise!) for an ICE car. With Turo I always know exactly what I'm going to get, and it's easy to search for a car with specific attributes, like AWD or a roof rack. But yeah, you're also at the mercy of whoever random person owns the car, and it sounds like Turo's customer support is garbage when there's a problem.
- wenc 2y ago
  National is excellent but you pay a premium. They focus on airports and business travelers, which means their fleet is newer and less beat up (also tend to be driven by individuals rather than families). If you sign up for free Emerald program, theres no waiting. Go to lot, pick any car and drive to gate and check out. Enterprise owns them but they definitely operate on a different tier of service. If your work has discount codes with them, they're definitely better than all the other rental agencies. (I travel for work and have rented from almost all the major brands) Problem with Turo is that most credit card damage waivers don't work with Turo.
templeOSdotcom 2y ago
I loved his show on VICE but Huang is the poster child of first-world problems.

136 points by herbertl 2y ago

A lot of it boils down to a promise that existing systems (and existing ways to handle error and deter wrongdoing) have somehow been replaced by "With An App" that efficiently reimplements what came before... but in reality most of the expensive features have been secretly removed, and you won't find that out until you're the one getting screwed. Come to think of it, a similar phenomenon applies to cryptocurrencies: Even when they aren't an outright fraud, somebody has just thrown away the hard parts learned over centuries, quietly dropping them or trying to convince you that it's better to be entirely without.

AnthonyMouse 2y ago
The general pattern is this: You create a system, it has problems, people establish some apparatus to address the problems, the apparatus is a central chokepoint which is then captured by incumbents and abused for oppression, people demand a new system, you create a new system, it has problems, ... You either need to prevent the apparatus from being captured by incumbents or you need to prevent it from being a central chokepoint that can be abused for oppression.
- unclebucknasty 2y ago
  >The general pattern is this Definitely sounds like one vector, along with enshittification and other factors. >*You either need to prevent the apparatus...or..." That solution set kind of assumes that we must get to this point where those are the viable options. For me that begs the question, "what's underlying all of this that makes it so arriving here is the pattern?" For example, questioning what we can do about such centralization and entrenched incumbencies in the first place; exploring whether some industries should be not-for-profit or public benefit, etc. In general, the current system/economy presents a ton of inertia, frequently backed by network effects. I think we'll need to start looking at more creative/disruptive solutions for many of these issues.
  - nradov 2y ago
    There's nothing wrong with offering consumer services through not-for-profit or public benefit corporations. The problem is getting enough initial capital to keep it running until it's cash flow neutral. Regular investors want to maximize returns so then you're stuck trying to find wealthy people to donate. Good luck with that.
    - unclebucknasty 2y ago
      >Regular investors want to maximize returns It's a good point, and what you're really underscoring here gets to the heart of my comment—that is, the "creative/disruptive" solutions I referenced will require a re-think of everything, including the current "get investors who expect infinite returns" model. Likewise, expanding our thinking beyond wealthy donors being the only other alternative. So, for instance, crowd-fundable or lower capex businesses may need to be prioritized. There are many other creative avenues waiting to be discovered. Because, I agree that it's hard to see how you can keep all of these elements of the current model (and baseline assumptions) in place and expect a different outcome. So, once you pull the thread of disruption, it'll unwind a lot more that needs to be addressed/solved. But, I believe it would be worth the pull.
      - nradov 2y ago
        That's just hand waving. The vast majority of people with capital will only ever be willing to invest based on expected returns. If they don't have a chance to make a significant profit on a risk-adjusted basis then they won't invest at all. They'll just keep their cash in the bank or spend it on consumption or real estate instead.
        unclebucknasty 2y ago
        >That's just hand waving. The vast majority of people with capital will only ever be willing... Yes, if the only option you can imagine for building a business is to go the traditional investor/VC route, then this is probably true. Kind of odd, though. You actually introduced the idea of "regular investors" being some sort of requirement, when the whole point is to re-imagine how we build businesses. But, I suppose all new ideas—especially disruptive ones—appear as hand waving, given that most people are unable to imagine beyond the status quo.
- myroon5 2y ago
  “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/98215-every-great-cause-begins-as-a-movement-becomes-a-business https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/98215-every-great-cause-beg...
netsharc 2y ago
The whole "with crypto, you don't need to put your faith in anyone [foremost: the banking system], the ledger is the single source of truth" is depressing. Remember the word "credit" is Latin for "I believe/trust".
- Rhapso 2y ago
  It turns put you can generally trust banks... to follow laws!

hellojimbo 2y ago

All of these peer to peer apps have the same fate; it works in the high trust parts of the country, but the moment you scale, the quality of service decreases, fees increase, etc.

missedthecue 2y ago
That's all businesses. Ever visited an inner city corner market? Items cost more, there's less selection, and quality of service? The employees are behind bulletproof glass.

SpicyLemonZest 2y ago

I don't understand this story. Why would you have an "expectation that the service will be professional", when you first heard about the company from news reports their service was used in multiple terrorist attacks? When was there ever a social contract that every company with an app can be trusted to provide high-quality service?

charles_f 2y ago
> their service was used in multiple terrorist attacks For as much as Turo sucks, the fact that vehicles used in terrorist attacks were rented through them is somewhat irrelevant to the trust you should put into the service ; not much more than where they ate their breakfast before, slept that night, or what brand of clothing they were wearing. It seems that said terrorists didn't have a criminal background, and they could very well have rented them through Avis, Enterprise and whatnot. They could have purchased Teslas, that would not have made Teslas a more terrorist-risk prone car than a Ford.
- RegnisGnaw 2y ago
  Remember that both the WTC Bombing and Oklahoma City bombing used Ryder rental vans. Should we distrust Ryder van rentals?
- SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
  Right, it’s entirely irrelevant! So why was the source author surprised when he used this car rental company he had no reason to trust and they turned out to be untrustworthy?
AnthonyMouse 2y ago
Not only that, it sounds like the sort of thing that could happen with rental cars in general. The car is being rented out to randos, one of the randos does something sufficiently heinous with the car to cause the registration to be immediately suspended and then returns it without saying anything, the next renter gets a car with a suspended registration before the rental place gets the notice telling them about it.

namaria 2y ago

[flagged]

IncreasePosts 2y ago
[flagged]
- DangitBobby 2y ago
  "Cinvicted criminal should be punished arbitrarily until they are dead."
  - _9za9 2y ago
    Found Eddie Huang's HN account
- charles_f 2y ago
  Fact that it's in their file means they went through the justice system for it, and paid for their crime, which is precisely part of the social contract. Point of their article is that tech services should be bound to some similar expectation. What you're suggesting is that making some mistake in your early years makes you unredeamable to society's eyes. And even then, it's an attack ad hominem. Who makes an argument doesn't detracts from the argument's validity if it's a good one.
- _9za9 2y ago
  Assault charges as a youth, dog mutilator as an adult. Did you see he cut off his dogs tail?
DangitBobby 2y ago
"Victim gets what he deserves."
- namaria 2y ago
  At some point we need to know the difference between making decisions in good faith or seeking discounted goods and services in a way that jeopardize your own family safety. Knee-jerk reactions related to template interpretations of the situation do not help.

_heimdall 2y ago

I avoid the whole "sharing economy" as much as possible. I think I've taken an uber or lyft twice when I was in a pinch in a city I wasn't familiar with, and once ordered a truck part to be delivered from a store in town that ended up being through a third party app (I couldn't drive down without the replacement fuel pump). I really don't get the hope of trusting individuals that are arguably being taken advantage of by a faceless tech business rather than trusting employees or contractors that are at least more invested in customer service for the company. It makes about as much sense to me as distrusting humans so much that you want to put all your wealth in a glorified git repo coded by humans and run by a small number of people. Either trust people or don't, its a pretty simple choice. Convincing ourselves that a layer of tech can abstract humans away so much that we don't need to trust anyone is just absurd.

whimsicalism 2y ago
it sounds like you are less trustful of strangers, not more - and i’m confused why you’re spinning it the opposite
- _heimdall 2y ago
  I don't quite follow your point, can you help me out here? > it sounds like you are less trustful of strangers, not more Less trustful of strangers compared to what? > i’m confused why you’re spinning it the opposite What am I spinning the opposite? My point was that I don't trust the incentives behind the sharing economy and have no reason to expect better service than from the more service-focused businesses they're attempting to replace. I very much expect that I just didn't explain myself well in the earlier comment. Sorry about that.

narcraft 2y ago

"These tech companies used lobbies to destroy the enterprise structure of our civilization from taxi cab medallions to hotels to brick-and-mortar businesses." Taxi cab medallions are a very poor example to cite. I'm empathetic to the story of terrible customer service and share sentiments about the overall erosion of user experience with many tech-adjacent, so-called disruptive services, but the second anyone suggests we were better off with the taxi cab than Uber or Lyft, they lose all credibility in my eyes. I think the biggest benefit that many fail to mention is that you can actually get rides when and where you need to. For example, people have far fewer excuses to drunk drive from bars in my hometown now than they did 15 years ago. I've had my skin saved by several rides that would be impossible without ride-sharing services.

narcraft 2y ago
And for the record, I've also had comically bad experiences with Lyft and Uber including drivers ranting about other customers in smelly unkempt cars (while on a date!) and my ride being significantly delayed because the driver wanted to stop for gas and also got themselves dinner while they were there. And I still love this crap!
- kelnos 2y ago
  Did you rate those drivers appropriately, and not tip them? In general I try to avoid giving any less than 5 stars for anything but a safety issue, because a low-4.x rating can get a driver deactivated. But stopping for gas and getting food? Nope, that's gonna get you a low rating. The ranting about other customers thing is something I'm torn on. Everyone has a bad day sometimes, and that shouldn't affect their livelihood. But still...
dehrmann 2y ago
Taxis are great if you're in Manhattan (or JFK) and not going too far uptown.
- the_third_wave 2y ago
  It's been a while since I was at JFK but when I frequented it I always took the subway. Same for Heathrow, CDG, etc. I generally have much better experiences with general public transport than I do with any sort of taxi "service" but maybe I'm the odd one out?

dehrmann 2y ago

There's truth to the main point that "gig economy" companies aren't adequately held responsible for the services they broker or sell (depending on your perspective). They avoid risk in a way that isn't obvious to buyers until something goes wrong, and there are few enough horror stories that they can stay in business. That's the meat of the story. It goes off the rails a bit with quotes like these, and mentions "Big Tech," but is really about the gig economy brokers. > [tech billionaires] not only destroyed the financial system Not really. Maybe he lumped 2008 bankers in with tech, but Uber was the worst offender, and it disrupted a differently bad taxi medallion monopoly, not the "financial system." > These corporations don’t pay taxes Also not true. I'm sure some don't because they're not profitable, but you can't be not profitable forever.

aprilthird2021 2y ago
Yeah it's not a perfect article. But I appreciate the sentiment ultimately
jimnotgym 2y ago
>Also not true. I'm sure some don't because they're not profitable, but you can't be not profitable forever. They might pay taxes in some jurisdiction, but usually not in the UK. The profit problem is actually that they can be not profitable for a really long time due to VC money. Long enough to put competitors out of business, for instance
- dehrmann 2y ago
  Uber and Lyft are both public and profitable, now. The drivers also pay taxes on their earnings.

waltercool 2y ago

[flagged]

crooked-v 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract
- NullPrefix 2y ago
  The description of social contract does not imply that it was signed by me
  - tomrod 2y ago
    Yet you are a significant beneficiary to it, ergo society has claim to you.
  - netsharc 2y ago
    Not a lawyer, but: When you order food at a restaurant, the law assumes an implied contract—you agree to pay for what you consume. Even without a written agreement, courts recognize this as a valid contract based on common practice. I wonder if a future society can allow geniuses like you to opt-out of the social contract, and there'd be outlaws roaming the lands, ready to rob you that evening, hey you agreed to opt out of police protection!
    - palata 2y ago
      In one sentence: "contract" does not not mean "legal contract" here.
    - NullPrefix 2y ago
      >When you order food at a restaurant once again, this is an implication that I ordered it. If you put a gun to my face and demand that I order a McBurger, that does not mean that we entered a contract.
- 2y ago

Gunax 2y ago

[flagged]

aprilthird2021 2y ago
The guy had to order 2 cars since the first didn't show up, his second car was illegal to drive but still rented out to him, and then he was charged a bunch of clearly fraudulent fees by an angry "host" who is mad his car wasn't street legal. Idk, I think he has the right to complain about that. It's all wrong, and his time is worth something and should be compensated for.
jimnotgym 2y ago
It is OK to force corporations to provide the service that they were contracted to provide, yes. I think most right minded people would agree with that.
- Gunax 2y ago
  That's correct. My criticism is that he bends this into a criticism of tech in general. As if they somehow denied him the ability to rent a car from somewhere else.
  - jimnotgym 2y ago
    It is a valid criticism of VC backed tech, awash with free money and able to operate below the margins of other rental firms, thereby forcing them out of business. It is also a valid criticism of tech firms that decide they can disrupt a market by pretending the rules don't apply to them. That is until the law catches up with them, by which time they have degraded their competition.

comrade1234 2y ago

My experience at rental car companies has in the last couple of years degraded to say the least. Customer service has been pretty hostile similar to the descriptions of turo in this article. I think part of it is consolidation of the companies. Hertz now seems to be hertz plus dollar plus some other company. Hertz used to be cool (and more expensive, now it’s one of the cheapest). It feels like it felt as the taxi companies were being killed by uber and later Lyft. Some external factor is causing them to fail and they’re floundering and clawing for every penny they can get. I never heard of turo but may check it out for my next trip to the USA. But I think the real killer of the rental car companies is rideshare. It’s now usually cheaper for me to do two rides a day on rideshare than to rent a car for a week.

kelnos 2y ago
> It’s now usually cheaper for me to do two rides a day on rideshare than to rent a car for a week. That's a big thing too. Whenever I have to rent a car, I go for the cheapest option, and that usually ends up being no lower than $60/day (plus taxes). If I only need it for a couple rides per day, that could very easily cost less. Plus I don't need to deal with gas, parking, or returning the car, worry about damaging the car, or ensure that I haven't had alcohol to drink before those trips.
wenc 2y ago
National Car is the best in my experience.

zombiwoof 2y ago

What’s amazing about Turo is how they just get around the law and regulation to screw everyone but themselves How? They don’t rent airport space they use existing lots. Hawaii airports are full all the time because Turo cars are parked in them waiting for passengers Image all the car companies doing that. Fuck Turo

ipv6ipv4 2y ago

He should have taken the car to the local police station to be impounded and started a credit card chargeback the moment Turo started demanding that he return a car that isn't legally drivable. It's still not too late to initiate the charge back.

ycombinatrix 2y ago
Don't forget to make notes of all communication with Turo & the "host"

TrackerFF 2y ago

I used to take Uber, now I'm back to taking regular cabs. I used to rent AirBnB, now I'm back to booking hotel rooms. And that goes for pretty much any "gigging" or "sharing" economy service. The past year, I've only used a food delivery service once.

jimnotgym 2y ago

I can't believe what I'm reading on this thread. I have seen two people argue that it is OK for a corporation to not provide the service it is contracted to provide. I have seen one argue that it is OK to commit fraud. I have seen one claim that there is no such thing as a social contract. I call you all out as sub-human, waste of a skin, unethical, money worshippers. Get a grip of yourselves before the pendulum swings back from the far right, and knocks you off your perch. The government and the law exist to keep property from the majority. If you erode those systems for short term business gains, you will lose that protection. Your smart mouths and Ayn Rand books won't offer the slightest resistance when the majority kick in your door, and take their share. Meritocracy won't mean 'who had a rich dad and went to a fancy school' anymore. Meritocracy will be about who is strongest, the nerd or the mob of manual labourers. What a bunch of clowns.

kelnos 2y ago

I've fortunately had nothing but great experiences renting through Turo, but a story like this will definitely give me pause if I am in the position of considering renting through them again. OP praises Enterprise, but I can't say I've ever had a delightful experience with them, or with any of the big car rental chains. Usually it involves a 20 minute wait in a line at an airport, followed by 10 minutes of someone typing into a computer for who knows what reason, followed by me wandering aimlessly in a parking lot looking for the correct car, which is always a surprise. There was also the time when I paid up front online for a car, and when I got there they wanted to give me an EV. I didn't want one, because I was pretty sure I was driving to a place with little to no charging infrastructure, and they ended up charging me more (surprise!) for an ICE car. With Turo I always know exactly what I'm going to get, and it's easy to search for a car with specific attributes, like AWD or a roof rack. But yeah, you're also at the mercy of whoever random person owns the car, and it sounds like Turo's customer support is garbage when there's a problem.

wenc 2y ago
National is excellent but you pay a premium. They focus on airports and business travelers, which means their fleet is newer and less beat up (also tend to be driven by individuals rather than families). If you sign up for free Emerald program, theres no waiting. Go to lot, pick any car and drive to gate and check out. Enterprise owns them but they definitely operate on a different tier of service. If your work has discount codes with them, they're definitely better than all the other rental agencies. (I travel for work and have rented from almost all the major brands) Problem with Turo is that most credit card damage waivers don't work with Turo.

templeOSdotcom 2y ago

I loved his show on VICE but Huang is the poster child of first-world problems.